Could you re-do the tests for break points on the 2.0 second spells, Dudor? I.e. any of the traditional nearsight classes (Eld/Cab/RM), resist debuffs, or bolts?

I'm assuming the Ment and possible the Wiz) nearsights have incorrect delves, or (unlikely) function differently because they also have a debuff effect. If the latter is the reason for the different cast time, perhaps something similar happens in other spells with two effects (e.g. lifetaps, DD/snare nukes).

EDIT: Might also be worthwhile testing higher levels of dex on the 2.5 second nuke to find out the next breaking point. =)

It might be possible to reach an even higher breaking point on 3.0 spells too, as lurikeen/saracens can get up to 433 dex.

Tag. I'd like to get some definitive results on the 3.0 speed cast time spells. It seems that there is a dex range for the breaking point from ~371-381 based on reading the tests from this 7 page long thread.

In my experience, I feltthat at 378 dex with a 3.0 spell, that the breaking point was between there and 386 (with my dex myth). I swapped between this and a focal myth and could tell a difference.

I have latency issues so testing would be next to worthless.

I would like another few tests from the pros to narrow in on that breaking point. (Also, this was with the 3.0 speed UI Warlock cast)

Someone with 2 computers should make a lurikeen mentalist and a lurikeen eldritch with the same dex at creation, with no dex or cast speed equipped and the same level (preferably 19). Go to a camp and see if the nearsights cast the same speed with dex and cast speed mostly taken out of the equation.

Someone was telling me that mordred still has /level 40, so that might be an easy place to test. You could even put 0 dex at creation and not waste a character that way.

After that, someone should do tests with lower dex (260-340ish) and 7% cast speed for the common spell speeds. Us molvik fanatics would you.

Your latency will still be relatively consistent enough for this type of test, since you're only looking for the value of dex on either side of a breaking point. I.e. even if you had a 5 second delay, you should be able to find the breaking point when your casting time drops by about 10-12 seconds.

Interesting subject, and one that I've been investigatinbg throughout my 7 years of DAoC. I'm afraid I'm gonna have to disagree with your findings. From a statistical standpoint you dataset is much too limited to be saying anything meaningful. This is why the subject has always been shrouded in mystery since noone can be arsed to do the tests with 1000+ casts. Feel free to disagree with me, but here's my working theory in case you were wondering. The formula below does NOT come from a mythic source, but is rather an approximation based on observation. But the fact that it's so similar to the well known swingspeed formula makes me pretty confident in claiming that it's accurate.

Following is just copy/pasted from my guildforum ..

Castspeed is dependant on two things. Your dexterity attribute and your spellhaste bonus (ToA). There's an ongoing debate among casters as to how this is calculated exactly, as testing this is very problematic due to lag issues. However, following is the current working theory and the numbers seem to hold up.

Firstly there's a cap on how fast any spell can be cast. Cap is 40% of delvevalue on castspeed. Hence a 2.0s spell can never cast faster than 0.8s.

The casttime of a given spell is derived from this formula :

[casttime] = [delve] * (1 - ([dex] - 70)/600))*(1 - ([Toa%]/100)))

i.e. linear improvement with dex, no 'step' at 250 or any other value. 0.167% per dex. Or roughly 1% castspeed per 6 in dexterity.

With a little math we can determine (theoretically) the dexterity attribute needed to hit this cap. With 10% ToA haste, a dex of 404 will cap your castspeed for all intents and purposes (430 w/o ToA). There does not seem to be any kind of diminishing returns when it comes to dex and castingspeed. Most people seem to agree however, that there is little reason to go above ~380 dex.

Click to expand...

40% of 2.0s is not .8 therefore this is invalid I trust the guy who did the actual work.

Someone with 2 computers should make a lurikeen mentalist and a lurikeen eldritch with the same dex at creation, with no dex or cast speed equipped and the same level (preferably 19). Go to a camp and see if the nearsights cast the same speed with dex and cast speed mostly taken out of the equation.

Someone was telling me that mordred still has /level 40, so that might be an easy place to test.

Click to expand...

I bet the debuff component slows the menty NS down just slightly. Ie, the debuff fires "after" the nearsight, but still takes time. Just a hypothesis though.

Didn't bother to read all 4 pages but I am sure it has something to do with how the game clock rounds off or rather drops decimals at a certain resolution and when it allows spells to actually start casting. This would cause things to line up in different ways depending when you start casting causing trends of when these line up to either round off time or cause delays. But if the coding is even in %s of seconds before the decimal is dropped it should have a very small effect so who knows?

I remember Mythic telling the TLs that they needed a sample size of around 5000 before they would even look at any tests seriously. I never could figure out if this was honest or just a way of saying f@#$ you we don't want you testing stuff.

Didn't bother to read all 4 pages but I am sure it has something to do with how the game clock rounds off or rather drops decimals at a certain resolution and when it allows spells to actually start casting. This would cause things to line up in different ways depending when you start casting causing trends of when these line up to either round off time or cause delays. But if the coding is even in %s of seconds before the decimal is dropped it should have a very small effect so who knows?

I remember Mythic telling the TLs that they needed a sample size of around 5000 before they would even look at any tests seriously. I never could figure out if this was honest or just a way of saying f@#$ you we don't want you testing stuff.

Click to expand...

You mean if it were, for example, rounded off to two decimal places? So that if the calculation for dex had it giving you a set amount of speed reduction, 1.129 (just plucking random numbers out of the air) would be the same as 1.121 (i.e. both considered as 1.12), and you wouldn't see a noticeable difference until you had enough dex to take you down to 1.119, which would round down to give you the next reduction in speed (1.11). That seems reasonable. (Although I think I've butchered the explanation of what I meant, and it might not have anything to do with what you posted! )

Race on ment? idk only reasonable thing to me, if the game calculates racial dex first then adds in item/myth/toa bonus in the fomula, you would get different breaking points depending on race.

Click to expand...

I'm willing to be it is the energy debuff that is attached to the nearsight that slows it down slightly. It casts the nearsight then insta-fires the debuff. Except that the "insta" isn't really 100% insta. Not 100% sure though, but it seems logical. If someone could test with cabby/wizard it could verify this.

It is still pretty much 386 on any caster. I guess you could opt for more dex on a spec nuking class, but you won't be able to reach 392 w/o dumping extra pts into aug dex or using a dragon or dex mythirian. My wizard maxes out at 391 with dex4. No way I'm ever getting dex5. so I just use a dragon mythirian on him and run around 388-9 dex.